[WikiEN-l] Off-article linkspamming

[Jimmy Wales]

I think I agree with your breakdown...

Spam is spam.  Linking to your own sites from your own personal user and 
user talk pages is fine and common practice.  Putting an eternal link in 
your sig is an abomination from an aesthetic perspective if nothing else. :)

Deletion of spammy urls from pages, and indeed deletion of whole pages 
in some cases, are always a good idea.  And blocking people who do such 
things is a good idea too.

A wrote:
> I have noticed an emerging trend for linkspammers to spam their sites on
> article talk pages, user pages and user talk pages, especially after failing
> to get their spam placed in an article itself. [[WP:SPAM]] does not have a
> clearly formulated policy on this from what I can see.
> 
> For instance, [[User:Hoodia]] was especially egregious today, spamming the
> [[Hoodia]] article, but also setting up a User talk page that consisted
> entirely of spam:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hoodia&oldid=94315565
> 
> This case is obvious and common sense, but I have seen more subtle issues
> recently, such as this editor listing her site
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/ after her signature:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AStephen_Barrett&diff=93819056&oldid=93777864(scroll
> to bottom)
> 
> Does this count as linkspam? It struck me and other editors as
> inappropriate.
> 
> SEO spammers are going to want a working link from Wikipedia to improve
> results, so I suppose <nowiki> is an option in many of these cases. As
> another example, a longtime detractor of mine who was eventually blocked for
> linkspamming still managed to spam links removed from various articles to
> her bostonschoolofelectrolysis.com website via another editor's talk page:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alphachimp/Archive_7#PLEASE_REPLY_AND_EXPLAIN_YOUR_SELF
> 
> This is now archived and indexed on Google, effectively achieving the
> desired result of a direct link from Wikipedia.
> 
> These phenomena seem like something we should address before it gets much
> worse. I guess the most contentious one would be links to one's own sites on
> one's User and User:Talk pages. I'm not sure how that line should be drawn.
> A blanket ban would probably drive some editors away, and any policy would
> probably have a lot of gray area regarding what's acceptable.
> 
> Jokestress
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>